Wikipedia Review - Commentary

Commentary

Wikipedia Review is not a conspiracy, a team-building exercise, a role-playing game, or an experiment in collusion. It is not meant as a resource or training ground for those who would instill fear and misery in others. It does not exist to corrupt, but to expose corruption; it does not exist to tear down institutions, but to expose the ways in which institutions are torn down; it does not exist to hate, but is meant to expose hate in others. To expose these things is not evil. It is not a monolithic entity, nor the sum of its parts. Like-mindedness does not imply singularity of purpose; respect for the rights of one group does not imply disrespect for the rights of another. It is not intended to be predictable, consistent, or dull.

Imagine a world in which human beings are not user accounts, are not programmable, and are not mere words on a display screen. That's what we're doing...

—Statement made when the site was out of service, Wikipedia Review

Seth Finkelstein wrote in The Guardian that Wikipedia Review has provided a focal point for investigation into Wikipedia-related matters such as the "Essjay controversy". Cade Metz, writing for The Register, credited Wikipedia Review with the discovery of a private mailing list that led to the resignation of a Wikipedia administrator; he also wrote that a Wikipedia proposal called "BADSITES" intended to ban the mention of Wikipedia Review and similar sites on Wikipedia. The Independent noted that "allegations against certain administrators came to a head on a site called Wikipedia Review, where people debate the administrators' actions." The Irish technology website Silicon Republic suggested visiting Wikipedia Review in order to "follow disputes, discussions, editors and general bureaucracy on Wikipedia". Philip Coppens used posts made on Wikipedia Review to help construct a report, published in Nexus Magazine, on WikiScanner and allegations that intelligence agencies had been using Wikipedia to spread disinformation.